NV-Monmouth: Clinton +4
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:45:18 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  NV-Monmouth: Clinton +4
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: NV-Monmouth: Clinton +4  (Read 2650 times)
Know Nothing
Rookie
**
Posts: 24
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 11, 2016, 12:07:33 PM »

Don't have the full link, but I saw it on twitter.

https ://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/752548412046934021

I'll post it if I find it.

Clinton 45%
Trump 41%

GOP: Trump 88-6
DEM: Clinton 92-3
IND: Trump 39-37
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2016, 12:11:08 PM »

I expect Nevada to be competitive this time. I expect that Hillary won't win so many Dems as this poll seems to indicate.
Logged
Heisenberg
SecureAmerica
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,110
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2016, 12:11:41 PM »

Not too bad. Trump barely wins Independents. If he can slightly go up with Republicans, he can keep it close, but there are better targets. I wonder if they polled the Senate race.
Logged
HillOfANight
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,459
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2016, 12:11:52 PM »

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/monmouth-university-24854

Clinton 45
Trump 41
Johnson 5
Undecided 4
None 4

Clinton leads among women 53 percent to 38 percent, while among men, Trump leads 44 percent to 37 percent.
Logged
Know Nothing
Rookie
**
Posts: 24
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 11, 2016, 12:13:03 PM »

Not too bad. Trump barely wins Independents. If he can slightly go up with Republicans, he can keep it close, but there are better targets. I wonder if they polled the Senate race.

Heck is up 42-40
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 11, 2016, 12:13:25 PM »

I expect Nevada to be competitive this time. I expect that Hillary won't win so many Dems as this poll seems to indicate.


Hope you're right, but I think the state definitely leans D due to the demographics. With Sandoval as VP, Big Don would probably win. But good to see that he's strong among Republicans and slightly leading with Indepedents.
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 11, 2016, 12:13:40 PM »

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/monmouth-university-24854

Clinton 45
Trump 41
Johnson 5
Undecided 4
None 4

Clinton leads among women 53 percent to 38 percent, while among men, Trump leads 44 percent to 37 percent.

That's a very small lead among men. Trump has a lot of room to improve there.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,478
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 11, 2016, 12:14:28 PM »
« Edited: July 11, 2016, 12:19:46 PM by Gass3268 »

Safe D. NV polling average had underestimated Obama by 4%.
Logged
Heisenberg
SecureAmerica
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,110
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 11, 2016, 12:14:49 PM »

Not too bad. Trump barely wins Independents. If he can slightly go up with Republicans, he can keep it close, but there are better targets. I wonder if they polled the Senate race.

Heck is up 42-40
Cool. I found it just after posting the reply.
Logged
HillOfANight
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,459
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 11, 2016, 12:19:40 PM »

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2016-07-11/clinton-holds-small-lead-over-trump-in-nevada-monmouth-poll

White voters prefer Trump by 49% to 37%, while Hispanic, black and Asian voters choose Clinton by 64% to 23%.

Similar white margin to 2012 (Obama 43% Romney 56%).
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 11, 2016, 12:22:37 PM »

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2016-07-11/clinton-holds-small-lead-over-trump-in-nevada-monmouth-poll

White voters prefer Trump by 49% to 37%, while Hispanic, black and Asian voters choose Clinton by 64% to 23%.

Similar white margin to 2012 (Obama 43% Romney 56%).

Poor result among whites. Trump needs to improve there a great deal. More proof it's the Anti-Trump people he still can't unite.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2016, 12:25:10 PM »

Sorry, Trump's not winning NV. Obama's polls were actually weaker than this in 2012.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2016, 12:25:41 PM »

How many Hispanics vote in Clark County (greater "Lost Wages") in November? No matter what their economic situation and ever level of assimilation they are going to give Donald Trump a political drubbing. See also Colorado, Florida, and maybe Arizona and Texas this year.  
Logged
HillOfANight
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,459
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2016, 12:29:21 PM »

http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_NV_071116/
http://www.monmouth.edu/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=40802209093

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Problematic to poll in Nevada English only...

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,478
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 11, 2016, 12:42:01 PM »

Lol, Clinton is winning by 4 in an English only poll. Safe D
Logged
Seriously?
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,029
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2016, 12:50:39 PM »

Safe D. NV polling average had underestimated Obama by 4%.
How do you get to safe? Even if your "underestimated" allegation is true, it's still just "Lean D."

In reality it should technically remain in the "tossup" category at 4% with a slight lean D.
Logged
Likely Voter
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,344


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2016, 12:54:44 PM »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs.  This is probably due to Latinos and high turnover of population.  Nevada is both a top 5 growth state and top 5 Latino population state. 
 
Certainly any pollster doing Nevada should have Spanish as an option.
Logged
dspNY
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,802
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2016, 12:56:25 PM »

Clinton +4 without any exclusively Spanish-speaking voters in a Nevada poll is really Clinton +8. Nevada polls with no Spanish-speaking option favor the R's by at least 4 points. It's the reason why Reid kept his seat in 2010 despite all the polls showing him losing
Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,284
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2016, 01:32:56 PM »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs. 

You realize that Republican candidates in Nevada in 2014 outperformed the polls by a lot, right?
Logged
Likely Voter
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,344


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2016, 01:35:38 PM »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs.

You realize that Republican candidates in Nevada in 2014 outperformed the polls by a lot, right?

obviously i was talking about presidential cycles. Everyone knows turnout for presidential cycles is completely different. Certainly pollsters should model midterms differently than presidential years. So it is a moot point.
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2016, 02:15:01 PM »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs.

You realize that Republican candidates in Nevada in 2014 outperformed the polls by a lot, right?

obviously i was talking about presidential cycles. Everyone knows turnout for presidential cycles is completely different. Certainly pollsters should model midterms differently than presidential years. So it is a moot point.

There is no reason to suspect there is some kind if systemic bias among pollsters polling Nevada, particularly because 2014 proved otherwise. Until there is more proof, there is no reason to start unskewing Nevada polls.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2016, 02:52:02 PM »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs. 

You realize that Republican candidates in Nevada in 2014 outperformed the polls by a lot, right?

I'd sooner look to years where there were competitive races in Nevada as a basis for predictions this year, rather than a year when Democrats put up no effort in the state. In 2008, 2010, and 2012, polls underestimated Democrats, often by a lot.
Logged
heatcharger
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,233
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -1.04, S: -0.24

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2016, 02:55:57 PM »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs.

You realize that Republican candidates in Nevada in 2014 outperformed the polls by a lot, right?

obviously i was talking about presidential cycles. Everyone knows turnout for presidential cycles is completely different. Certainly pollsters should model midterms differently than presidential years. So it is a moot point.

There is no reason to suspect there is some kind if systemic bias among pollsters polling Nevada, particularly because 2014 proved otherwise. Until there is more proof, there is no reason to start unskewing Nevada polls.

Logged
john cage bubblegum
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 361


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2016, 03:15:13 PM »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs.

You realize that Republican candidates in Nevada in 2014 outperformed the polls by a lot, right?

obviously i was talking about presidential cycles. Everyone knows turnout for presidential cycles is completely different. Certainly pollsters should model midterms differently than presidential years. So it is a moot point.

There is no reason to suspect there is some kind if systemic bias among pollsters polling Nevada, particularly because 2014 proved otherwise. Until there is more proof, there is no reason to start unskewing Nevada polls.


There wasn't a competitive statewide race in Nevada in 2014, and in any case pollsters underestimated Republican support nationwide.  It's notable that in a year where this was happening, Hickenlooper slightly outperformed his polling average and Mark Udall matched it.

The 2008/2010/2012 elections have given us enough data points telling us that there is some issue (likely problems polling Latinos) that causes pollsters to underestimate the Democratic vote in Nevada/Colorado in competitive statewide races.

I guess we'll see if the pollsters can prove us wrong, but for now I think it's fair to presume that Dem support in CO/NV is being at least somewhat understated by the polls.
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,987
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: July 11, 2016, 03:49:05 PM »
« Edited: July 11, 2016, 03:58:00 PM by Ljube »

In the last 3 cycles pollsters have got Nevada wrong more than any other state, averaging 4-6 points over-estimating the Rs.

You realize that Republican candidates in Nevada in 2014 outperformed the polls by a lot, right?

obviously i was talking about presidential cycles. Everyone knows turnout for presidential cycles is completely different. Certainly pollsters should model midterms differently than presidential years. So it is a moot point.

There is no reason to suspect there is some kind if systemic bias among pollsters polling Nevada, particularly because 2014 proved otherwise. Until there is more proof, there is no reason to start unskewing Nevada polls.


There wasn't a competitive statewide race in Nevada in 2014, and in any case pollsters underestimated Republican support nationwide.  It's notable that in a year where this was happening, Hickenlooper slightly outperformed his polling average and Mark Udall matched it.

The 2008/2010/2012 elections have given us enough data points telling us that there is some issue (likely problems polling Latinos) that causes pollsters to underestimate the Democratic vote in Nevada/Colorado in competitive statewide races.

I guess we'll see if the pollsters can prove us wrong, but for now I think it's fair to presume that Dem support in CO/NV is being at least somewhat understated by the polls.


I mean, John, it's logical to assume that the pollsters have learned from their past mistakes, particularly because polling is what they do for living.

Therefore, unskewing the polls could prove unwise.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 13 queries.